I'm sorry to stick my nose into this possible bees-nest.
But I feel I have to object a little here.
On 1/26/07, Dave Crossland <dave at lab6.com> wrote:
> On 26/01/07, Richard Boehme <rboehme at gmail.com> wrote:
> > The point I bring from this is that if, for instance, TomTom has
> > mapping software that I want to use, I shouldn't have to jump through
> > hoops to get it. I should just be able to go into the market place, go
> > to 'Non-Free Software', and buy the TomTom app.
> >
> > Your argument may be 'but every software for the phone really should
> > be free - people will write it'. However, if someone hasn't come up
> > with an absolutely free, modifiable mapping software, I should just be
> > able to get the proprietary, closed version. It should be easier to do
> > that than to look in the marketplace, conclude 'oh, this doesn't
> > exist', and not get an OpenMoko phone because of it.
>> You are expanding "free" to "free to give up your freedom", which
> destroys the meaning of "freedom" with something like a Russell
> paradox.
>
Freedom also means freedom to choose what software I want to run.
If I want to run an OpenMoko version of the closed source program
'TomTom' for my navigation, then who are you to decide that I can't?
Sure, it would be nice if every piece of software available for the OM
was open sourced (under whatever licence), but we all know that there
will be software that will not be opened (TomTom could be one of
them).
Not every person likes to be _restricted_ to only GPL-licenced software.
I want to have the freedom to choose to install closed-source software
as well as open sourced software, and if I have to pay for that, then
that would be just fine.
> > If you feel allowing proprietary, closed software in hurts the 'free
> > your phone' spirit, and the market place is closed to them, it only
> > hurts the amount of applications available for the phone.
>> The amount of applications available for the phone is not the goal;
> the goal is to have a 100% free software phone.
>
No, the goal is to have a usable phone. A phone that works, with
software that people want and need.
That the phone's completely free is also great, but please leave ME
the freedom to choose to add closed-source to the stack too. You don't
have to, but it's not up to you to say that I can't choose that.
Freedom remember? (I just don't allow any DRM system to live on my
machines, that is where I draw the line :))
I understand your line of reasoning, I just happen to disagree with you.
I run Ubuntu here, on my home computer. But I do have Opera installed
(not open-source, but still a great application), and I do have some
closed sourced games installed (because there aren't a whole lot of
good open source games that actually interest me). Just to name a few
apps that I use regularly.
--
Marcel